+1 On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sounds reasonable... > Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <[email protected]>: > > > +1 > > > > 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <[email protected]>: > > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently > > > than most other projects. > > > What we do differently is the numbering of major releases. > > > Let me explain ... > > > ... our initial release are numbered like this: > > > 0.5 > > > 0.6 > > > 0.7 > > > > > > Our bugfix releases are: > > > 0.5.1 > > > 0.6.1 > > > 0.6.2 ..etc. > > > > > > I suggest to call the initial major releases > > > 0.7.0 > > > 0.8.0 and so on. > > > > > > > > > What is the advantage of this? > > > --> The names of our branches. > > > I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is > > called > > > "release-0.x" > > > From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent > bugfix > > > releases. > > > > > > It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if > we > > > follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released > versions, > > > 2-digit branches are work in progress > > > > > > > > > I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;) > > > > > > --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes > > and > > > features here. > > > \ \ > > > \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 > bugfixes > > > go here > > > \ \ > > > \ release-0.7.1 > > > --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 > bugfixes > > go > > > here > > > \ \ > > > release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable > > > release tags. > > > > > > > > > If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website. > > > > > >
